Top
Best
New

Posted by thoughtpeddler 20 hours ago

Right to Local Intelligence(righttointelligence.org)
451 points | 158 commentspage 2
tjwebbnorfolk 16 hours ago|
In the US at least, repealing a law takes the same number of votes as passing a new one. I don't follow the purpose of this, unless it's to pass a constitutional amendment or something. Or maybe just to get clicks on a website.

And I already have the right to local intelligence, because my GPUs are my private property, and if someone freely releases a beerware model then I can freely download it.

What am I missing?

julianlam 16 hours ago||
I think the bogeyman would be making possession of a local AI a felony.
pixl97 7 hours ago|||
How long do you think your hardware will last?
nok22kon 11 hours ago||
you can also freely download CP on your private property PC

but I wouldn't advise it

gpantazes 5 hours ago||
The petition does not have "District of Columbia" as an option for "In the US".
mixdup 2 hours ago|
Citizens of the District of Columbia have no one to contact. Their laws are set by Congress and their delegate to Congress cannot vote. I suppose you could contact the President, that's basically the only representation they have for this type of legislation
thighbaugh 16 hours ago||
They could be more clear and more specific but I would not be surprised to see licensing for this as a means of creating yet another compliancre ceiling and quick cash for state government to pinch out of the productive elements of society (those pinching, mostly lawyers, being glorified parasites that offer nothing to productive society other than pay-to-win access to "justice" and serving as time-shared mouthpieces for plutocrats while claiming to represent everyone within whatever unit of representation they hold).

And when even very intelligent, but excessively conceited, people hear the echo of their own reason9ing from conversational autocorrect and assume it is somehow akin to intelligent life, the normies will go with whatever the plutocrats push with their media outlets too absorbed in their own domain specific knowledge (and cowed into intellectual laziness by other media products they consume eagerly) to ever subject it to much thought that Claude might not be Skynet after all.

sublinear 16 hours ago|
> yet another compliance ceiling and quick cash for state government to pinch out of the productive elements of society

The twist is that AI is pushing all white collar jobs further into bureaucratic work. Nobody is losing their jobs and it's not quite a revolution, but despite all odds and headlines the younger generations are actually much better educated and positioned to do the right things as they take over.

An optimistic take is that since this is the middle class we're talking about, we get more productivity and more justice as a result. The only people upset about this are grifters and charlatans whose time is up.

throwatdem12311 7 hours ago||
I don’t care if it’s illegal. Making math illegal has been tried before (encryption) and it has failed and it will fail again.
Grimblewald 9 hours ago||
Eh, let em. If the US economy wants to self-sabotage, let them. Its a dying empire, lets its fall be hastened. I'm ready for china to fill the US vacuum. At least china controls it's billionairs (see jack ma saga) rather than the inverse.
indoorfish 9 hours ago|
This feels short-sighted unless you are ethnically han?
Planktonne 7 hours ago||
Do you feel that the US treats all ethnicities equally at the moment?
weare138 7 hours ago||
Just a suggestion, add a section with the relevant proposed legislature.
wesleywt 10 hours ago||
The biggest threat to the hyper-scalers is small bespoked models run locally. You don't need the world's stolen information to run a small project containing locally trained data you collected. But you do need to block everyone if you want to capture the entire market and get the trillion dollar valuation.
worik 10 hours ago|
> You don't need the world's stolen information to run a small project containing locally trained data you collected.

Local training? Is that feasible?

onesandofgrain 12 hours ago||
Pardon me, so they'll hunt down huggingface, ollama and china? I don't quite understand? What about the millenia of companies that provide apis for local llms and private companies that use local llms for privacy reasons? I don't even understand how you'd execute such a ruleset.
pixl97 7 hours ago||
I mean if you go into old AI safety discussion from before LLMs you'll see they don't do that. They go after new hardware. That's way easier than going after software. Hardware doesn't last forever and manufacturers will gladly cripple their cards and license powerful ones to businesses.
wesleywt 10 hours ago||
Dario and friends are fear mongering local models to get them banned.
no-name-here 8 hours ago||
“are”? Source? I've seen an absolute flood of “BREAKING:” claims online recently which are quotes from 3 years ago where all of their context is removed, or that quotes from 3 years ago are “because of GLM 5.2”, etc. https://www.techpolicy.press/transcript-senate-hearing-on-pr...
rhdunn 7 hours ago|||
Yes that clip [4] is making the rounds again in light of Mythos, but his stance (and that of others) hasn't changed ([3] is from a new interview).

[1] https://memeburn.com/amodei-says-open-source-ai-is-becoming-... [2 July 2026]

[2] https://fortune.com/2026/07/02/anthropic-fable-and-mythos-ar... [July 2, 2026]

[3] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/S72ZRBSNHZc [2 weeks ago] -- Dario: "Now what I do worry about with some of these laggard models is the risks of them, where we have Mythos-class cyber capabilities, 12 months from now we'll have much better cyber capabilities. But the Mythos-class cyber capabilities may just be available for anyone to download."

[4] https://digg.com/tech/zx1bqifo

no-name-here 6 hours ago||
Thanks for the reply.

[3] - he does express worry over the risks of open models -- much as he has long expressed worry over his own models (and AI safety was the primary reason for Anthropic's founding) -- but he does not even imply that they should be banned, and he even explicitly says there is nothing that can be done to stop open models from being distributed.

For completeness's sake:

[1] The primary linked source seems to also be the 2023 testimony, albeit posted with a timestamp from this week.

[2] Does not seem to quote Dario, nor mention banning - I think you included this as an example of someone else who is explicitly worried about AI risks, including of models that can't be pulled back -- fair enough (although I can't see that they have any association with a frontier lab). If the argument is that many people have concerns about AI risks, including risks specific to open models, and who are not associated with a frontier lab, I agree with you.

iLoveOncall 8 hours ago|
This is useless because AI has nothing to do with intelligence. It's just software.

You cannot ban local AI without banning local software which is obviously impossible.

Possession of software, even software that can be used for illegal purpose such as RATs and other viruses isn't illegal.

kube-system 5 hours ago||
There have been laws that control the distribution of software for decades.
pona-a 7 hours ago||
RATs do not require a datacenter to develop.
iLoveOncall 7 hours ago||
Ok? How is that relevant to the issue at hand?
pona-a 2 hours ago||
That a government has a much easier time controlling who's renting a building with the energy consumption of small city than what everyone's coding on their laptop?
More comments...